Posted by Gary_CA on 12/28/07 7:03pm
Msg #228051

Notary Affidavit...

Yeah, we've all seen these things... under perjury I state that I have identified the borrowers...yada yada yada (I thought that's what I was affirming when I stamped the damn doc but whatever...)

Now this one has a little twist...

I affirm under penalty of perjury...yada yada... **>> The borrower understands the documents he has signed<<**

Now how in the hell can I affirm that????

I'm gonna sign it and trust that His Honor will understand how little it meant, if ever it comes before him...

Brother...

[END RANT]

Reply by sue_pa on 12/28/07 7:16pm
Msg #228053

GMAC has one funky one with language something very roughly along the lines of ... I have made the borrower aware of what this document says ...

Reply by Susan Fischer on 12/28/07 7:47pm
Msg #228057

Oh, Crikey! They're trying to make things super

duper, more legaler, ultra legalist, with hyper legalisitically legalese, to cover all the butts that ever so much as passed by these docs.

The point remains that you just can't write your way out of all liability, no matter how many lawyers you have trying to make it disappear.

What if I just refuse to affirm what is in someone else's head? Huh? What if I just crossed that sucker out? Just like I do with the doc that wants me to notarize my own signature that I reallyreallyrealllllly checked someone's ID, or the one that wants a 'stamp as proof' of being a notary. What would happen, would someone's butt fall off?

Reply by JK/TX on 12/28/07 7:57pm
Msg #228058

Re: Oh, Crikey! They're trying to make things super

I affirm under penalty of perjury...yada yada... **>> The borrower understands the documents he has signed<<**

Now how in the hell can I affirm that????
__________________________________________________

You can't..... I would not sign that junk... let the title co sign it or refuse to sign it too.

Who knows, maybe someone's butt needs to fall off or down !! :O}

Reply by Charles_Ca on 12/28/07 8:19pm
Msg #228059

I agree, don't sigh crap 'cause it will eventually bite you! n/m

Reply by Charles_Ca on 12/28/07 9:36pm
Msg #228073

Dang that's supposed to be "sign" not sigh... Sigh! n/m

Reply by Demore on 12/28/07 8:20pm
Msg #228060

Re: Oh, Crikey! They're trying to make things super

LOL!
This is funny!

Reply by Susan Fischer on 12/28/07 10:29pm
Msg #228084

;) n/m

Reply by LisaWI on 12/29/07 9:45am
Msg #228117

Re: Heres a Thought.....

How about a affidavit for a LO or Mortgage Broker to sign that the borrowers understand the loan they are getting and the documents that they are signing. Signed and dated 24 hours before the closing and included with the docs for the signing?
Why does it seem the responsibility of these loan terms are coming right down the chain to us, when it should be started at the top?

Reply by JK/TX on 12/29/07 10:08am
Msg #228121

Re: Heres a Thought.....

Lisa, that won't work simply because it just makes too much sense. What an ideal solution!!

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/29/07 10:18am
Msg #228122

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

without provision for the Affidavit.

Reply by LisaWI on 12/29/07 11:05am
Msg #228124

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

To that, I ask, why on Gods green earth, would I sign an affidavit, if they dont have to?
This is really starting to "grind my gears"

Reply by LisaWI on 12/29/07 11:24am
Msg #228127

Re: And to Further my Rant........

Make the borrowers sign an affidavit stating they understand their loan. They are the ones crying foul that they didnt understand or were misled on their loan.
When everyone in the food chain has to be responsible for their actions, I will follow suit.

Reply by EastTxNotary on 12/29/07 12:24pm
Msg #228136

Re: And to Further my Rant........

How many times have you been with a BO and had them tell you that they think it would take a lawyer to understand all of the paperwork...so WTH! Just let me sign and get my money!

I think about all the disclosures that are required, the RTC (in most cases)...all the opportunities for the BO to "understand" their loan and I just can't seem to sympathize when they cry "foul".

I always remind them of the RTC and that if they have any questions after signing, to be SURE to read their paperwork and get those questions answered in that time frame. If it's an investment property, I tell them to feel free to read anything and/or call their LO right then if they have any questions.

I bet I could count on one hand the BO's that even bothered to look at their paperwork after I have gone.

I have made some pretty dumb financial decisions in my many years, but doggone it! I take responsibility for those mistakes and try to learn from them rather than expecting someone else to fix them.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 12:25pm
Msg #228137

Dot, amen and well said. n/m

Reply by sue_pa on 12/29/07 3:43pm
Msg #228163

Re: And to Further my Rant........

Absolutely. AND, if they REALLY insist, they can get their paperwork ahead of time. Having to sign 'today' is just not necessary.


...I have made some pretty dumb financial decisions in my many years, but doggone it! I take responsibility for those mistakes and try to learn from them rather than expecting someone else to fix them....

The queen here and I completely understood what I was doing each and every time I made those mistakes - was just hoping for a different outcome.

Reply by Karen/OK on 12/29/07 12:55pm
Msg #228144

Re: And to Further my Rant........

Amen!

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 12:17pm
Msg #228134

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

The UCI bandwagon here is not for the best interest of the notaries who post here, IMHO.

Lobbying the lawmakers for licensure is another joke from the perspective of the independant contractors on this board...again, IMHO. The notary movement for licensure will only bring attention to another entity (the notary) to blame for the mortgage "crisis" and remove the notary, insert the lawyer or title company employee.

Either of the above, IMHO, would benefit the small title companies and cripple the "far-reaching" ones.

While I don't know that either of the above is such a bad idea from the big scheme of things (and since I am working in legal/title/mortgage and not as a notary these days I don't have a hand in this poker game) however, put a huge amount of thought into what licensure and the UCI promotional efforts are here before getting on the band wagon. YOUR business is what the notary needs to look out for, and right now, I think supporting either or both of those things work to the detriment of the signing agent.

I've been waiting for someone to convince me that I am wrong, but to date...not happening.

While

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/29/07 12:35pm
Msg #228139

Re: Just so we're clear here....

I wasn't on any "bandwagon" - just stating a fact - a portion of the proposed UCI requires (a) Lender gets docs to Settlement Agent 48 hours prior to signing, and (b) Borrower receives documents, including HUD, 24 hours prior to scheduled signing for review. If this 24-hour review is not provided to the borrower then the signing is rescheduled.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 12:47pm
Msg #228140

I did not say that you were, or anyone was, Linda.

I was posting under Lisa's post, I think. Wasn't I?

Doesn't matter. My opinion stays the same....even if it is out of context.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 12:53pm
Msg #228142

...and the only reason I'm still here at my computer

opining about this is because I hate to shop and I've got to go shopping for summer clothes (for a cruise) when I would rather lay around in my PJs drinking Earl Grey Tea. It's winter for Pete's sake. I'll be paying premium prices for the clothes today.

I hate to say it but today I sound like one of those people who would gripe because they had to go to the bank if someone gave them a check for a million bucks.

I better get my attitude adjusted and get out there and get started. I think I'll go by my favorite thrift store first to see if there are any quality summer clothes out yet ripe for the pickens...then I'll go spend my $200 in gift certificates. See how little I like to shop? Even have the free money and still don't want to go. Pathetic.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/29/07 12:54pm
Msg #228143

Re: I hate shopping to..know how you feel

that's why I do most of mine online...<G>

Reply by sue_pa on 12/29/07 3:50pm
Msg #228166

I STILL don't get it

PLEASE SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THEY THINK THINGS WILL CHANGE if these are adopted. The instructions are from the lender to the title company telling them how they want their work completed. If a lender wants to supply the docs 24 hours ahead of time now, they can and will. These instructions are not law. Read through closing instructions you get today (had a Suntrust the other day with close to 20 pages - we've all seen the Countrywide 25ish pages, etc). They ALL say no fraud, no backdating, sign as typed, provide proper id, record security instrument timely, etc. Please raise your hand if you think any of this doesn't happen, even though it's written in black and white.

TRULY, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND BUT I JUST DON'T.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 6:36pm
Msg #228177

Re: I STILL don't get it

Sue, you are correct on what you've stated...lately, on this board however, somehow the UCI is being used as an impetus for licensure.

Reply by LisaWI on 12/29/07 12:50pm
Msg #228141

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

This is how I feel today, tomorrow could change, like you Brenda, I am waiting for someone to tell me and convince me, this is the realistic fix for this. MO, these UCI's are chucked full of holes, especially where we stand in them. Licensing, yes and no. Lots of professions are licensed. I feel it would weed out alot of part-timers and wanna-be's. Im half and half on the licensing issue. And absolutely agree, my support will be to the benefit of my livelyhood. That is exactly how I feel about this affidavit that Gary brought up. Is it in my best interest to sign one of these? Why would I want to be the sole person responsible for the borrowers understanding their docs? Makes no sense. Note to Gary: I am not digging at you for signing it, I just feel they are trying to lay too much responsibility on NSA's without laying the responsibility out evenly to all players.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 1:00pm
Msg #228145

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

Lisa...I think WDMD's post was so ON today...the abstracting part is all about the quality chain of title extracted...no license required there....the crux of ownership, yet the NOTARY is being told they need licensure?

Bottom line, this is going to cost big on the notary to be licensed in the insurance premium. Weed out? Possibly...the problem is the route from no license to license...lawmakers are primarily lawyers and lawyers in many states will want to bring this function of ours back into their secured nest. Why not? I cannot blame them...nor do I think it is a patently bad idea for lawyers to oversee the notary and assume responsibility like in Mass. HOWEVER, that having been said, this is a notary board...not a lawyer board and I'm speaking to the common sense thinking of notaries.

Why try to fix something that's working for the notary and the far-reaching title company who hires them? It is a fix for the title company which has losts business to the far-reaching title companies...NOT for the notary signing agent.

I welcome any and all opinions on this and read each of them...but haven't seen anything to make me see this is good for the notary's business....only for the legal and title business of which is now my own bread and butter, so I'm not biased to the notary's position...just clear on what will happen if Texas if this kind of this is proposed.

Reply by LisaWI on 12/29/07 1:37pm
Msg #228149

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

You know Brenda, I would love for things to stay just as they are. I like it right where its at. But something tells me its going to change whether I like it or not. Not knowing what direction this is going, is mind racking. For the Signing Agent Industry to go away completely seems unrealistic to me anyway. But in the world we live in, I suppose its possible. I hope not, my intentions were to do this for a very long time.

Now, where did I put that crystal ball, dang it?!

Reply by Lee/AR on 12/29/07 1:52pm
Msg #228151

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

Well... firstish...the UCI people are not the same people who make the laws. Second, there are 50 states--all of whom need to approve AND pass a 'universal' law--UNLESS it becomes a Federal thing. Which I kind of doubt as the Feds have managed to stay out of deciding how much interest becomes too much and have left that to each State to decide. As for making us responsible for what's in the Bo's head... gimme a break. Start the 'fixin' at the top of the pile, not the bottom.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/29/07 6:43pm
Msg #228178

Re: That's what the UCI is aiming for

**For the Signing Agent Industry to go away completely seems unrealistic to me anyway. But in the world we live in, I suppose its possible. I hope not, my intentions were to do this for a very long time. **

Somehow it did in Georgia. Completely. Lawyers are the signing agents now.

Since I wasn't around back then I don't know what kicked that into motion, but it sure went that way. We have a Ga/Atty here...maybe he/she will respond.

Reply by Charles_Ca on 12/29/07 7:44pm
Msg #228183

Pushing for licensing notaries seems to be someones idea

of creating more work for those who are licensed. People should be very careful what they wish for, the notary signer is only broken to those who are trying to limit competition, its not broken to anyone else and making a lot of noise about it being broken as some here like to will only catch the eye of some lawmaker looking for an easy target to say that they were able to help fix the system. Licensing is not a panacea. Also a license is not a commission regardless of what some wold like it to mean. Currently notaries are commissioned, would licensing be above and beyond a notary commission? A whole new bureaucracy would have to be established. A new bureaucracy is like letting the camel poke his nose under the edge of the tent, next thing you know the whole camel is inside. A new bureaucracy will have to justify its existence by poking it s nose into every aspect of the notary and signing business overlapping purview with other agencies over things like title insurance and escrow. It just doesn't make sense to me, notary signing work is not rocket science and from my standpoint as a broker and originator its not broken so why mess with it. Of all the actions by all the different entities on the path to closing a loan the notary is the most innocuous.

Reply by Elizabeth Soliday on 12/30/07 12:26am
Msg #228197

HA! That was funny Susan

Had one of those yesterday, Chase Bank and LSI. I really really reallllly checked their IDs (in lieu of making photo copies.)

But really, I have worked in the legal field and lawyers and judges are just as human as the rest of us. They would realize we were just trying to complete our task and they know you can't swear as to what someone else is thinking...that would be like hearsay.